jquagga: $80 bucks; no significant new features. Right, let me sign right up for that.
It doesn't even pass the laugh test.
Personally, I find dialing in perspective correction using LR4 works faster than using Viewpoint and "Upright", while automatic, rarely gets things exactly the way I want them. For removing spots (or anything else) I don't think anything can beat content-aware fill in Photoshop. An extra step but worth it, IMO.
madeinlisboa: Sticking to good old reliable and efficient CaptureNX....
I doubt there will be any upgrades for Capture NX2 but it definitely was a NIK product. Nikon had virtually nothing to do with it except for buying it.
Cipher: To those sticking with LR4, what will happen when Adobe releases updates to LR5 that enable it to handle RAW files from new cameras?
Use whatever software comes with the camera. This will most likely produce a .tiff file which may turn out to be the "new" high quality universal file type. At least the folks who make cameras feel obligated to provide a way to open the images produced by the camera.
Johnsonj: Again? I can't keep up! I need to totally ditch this company. I don't use half of what this program has to offer. I just get the idea that Adobe's trying to squeeze more money out of me. I'm sick of paying for this program over and over again! And their customer service SUCKS big time.
--And buy a new camera. Ok, it was a big expenditure, but now you're ready to see those great new images, right? But wait; there's one more thing to buy because your perfectly usable version of Lightroom no longer works because you bought a new camera.
roblarosa: I love these people that buy $3000 full frame cameras and $1500+ lenses and then complain about an $80 upgrade that is purely optional.
LR 4 still works! New cameras that will come along and won't be supported by LR4 can always be processed through the FREE DNG converter. Get a grip, people!
But when you think about it, there really is no reason that support for new cameras has to be tied to buying the latest version of Lightroom. It's one thing to buy the latest version to get some great new feature, but the ability to open your images is a necessity, not a feature.
marike6: Some below were getting on my case for daring to even attempt to understand the reviewer's justifications for bold claims like "the GR is a bit better in every way". Apparently we are supposed to just blindly accept every word written in these reviews like wide eyed sheeple consumers.
The thing is, not one person has been able to explain to me why the Coolpix A Sample Gallery looks so dramatically better than the Ricoh GR Sample Galllery.
I've pre-ordered the Ricoh GR to upgrade my GRD III, but frankly I'd rather have the Coolpix A IQ in the Ricoh GR body.
* Cue the "Markus is a Nikon fanboy jerk" comments from people who seem to spend more time attacking me than they do adding photos to their galleries, entering DPR challenges, or trying to contribute to the discussion in any meaningful way.
If I hadn't owned a bunch of Ricoh cameras, I'd say it was just rooting for the underdog. But they really do make great little cameras these days and it's hard to ignore a $200 difference. What's easy to ignore, IMHO, is DxO numbers, Ken Rockwell's opinions (stated as facts, of course), and so on.
The funny thing is, I do understand why somebody would buy the Nikon finder. We tend to think of these cameras in terms of the results but they are also aimed at the "prestige" consumer who might pay extra for a vintage-looking finder that says Nikon.
rallyfan: It is disappointing to see discussion of the Sigma DP M series in the comments below. The mere mention of that uninteresting series raises serious questions regarding the goals and rationale of its advocates. Umberto Eco noticed something similar about anyone that at any time and for any reason mentions the Templars.
If one finds reading about Sigma's cameras tiresome, a possible option would be to skip over those comments.
marike6: DPR writes: "its thunder is stolen by the Ricoh GR - a camera that achieves the unusual trick of being a touch better in almost every respect while also being significantly cheaper."
The GR is not better in:* high ISO ability* it doesn't have better DR* it doesn't have a better sensor* no 14-bit RAW* no manual focus ring* reds are not very good on the GR
DxOMark tested both cameras and the GR doesn't even break 1000 in their low-light ISO test (972 ISO vs 1164 ISO for the A).
Come on DPR, we get that you guys are enamored with the GR, but the bit about the GR being better in every way simply not true.
And writing such a quick review where almost every aspect of the A is a direct comparison to the GR actually does a disservice to your readers. Maybe you should have written no Coolpix A review and a GR / Coolpix A comparison. But the above review is kind of joyless review which is kind of odd as the DPR Coolpix A gallery is about the nicest you guys have done.
Next, you'll be arguing the Ricoh isn't actually cheaper. They both produce very similar, high quality relative to their size. If someone has to have a Nikon, fine, but I'm not impressed by DxO scores and statistics like 974 ISO vs. 1164 ISO. I get different credit scores but I'm really the same.
AnHund: A silver medal is ridiculus. The image quality you can get out of this camera is outstanding. Wonder if you set it to macro mode - in good light the AF is very good. Check reviews by Ming Thein, Ken Rockwell, Steve Huff etc.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who has made exactly the same observations as Dennis, above. Steve Huff loves everything to death. The only reviews that are more overwhelmingly favorable than Huff's are in Photoshop User magazine. Ken Rockwell takes a photo of his wristwatch and asks for donations to keep up his hard work. Thom Hogan seems to be a marketing consultant above all else but at least he seems level-headed.
Kodachrome200: Been a professional photographer and Nikon loyalist for 10 years. Just got my GR, love it to death. Ming Thein is a big nikon shooter to. He just got his GR. The thing is if guys like me who have been shooting Nikon DSLRs all day long for a decade dont find the Coolpix preferable who is going to. I actaully found the coolpix to be bit fumply to shoot with. combine that with the fact the despite what ming thein said i cannot find a situation where it focuses faster than the GR. The GR does lose alot of its focusing prowess in really low light but it seems to me it will always be faster than the A.
Nikon knows how to make SLRs. Ricoh knows how to make compacts.
I understand the comparisons with the Ricoh, which I'm sure is every bit as good, but this will be very difficult for fans to accept. (It really is 28Ti vs. GR-1 all over again, if anyone here goes back far enough).
But I don't see any comparison with the Fuji at all. Whatever their differences, the Nikon & Ricoh are "wide angle" cameras. The Fuji has an ever so slightly wide angle lens that many people consider a true "normal" because that's what it is.
I don't own one of these cameras but it seems that, as with the little Nikon, the only people who like them are those who own and use them. The folks who compare statistics or are concerned that a particular feature is "two years behind" don't like these cameras at all.
Obviously, paying less in salaries and benefits will buy some time but as a former boss of mine liked to say "Eventually, you run out of things to cut". It's true. He finally had to fire himself when he ran out of people to let go.
The 10 Worst College Majors
No. 2: Film, Video And Photographic Arts
I got a BA in photography but I should have taken the advice from The Graduate, "plastics".
munro harrap: In practice it is very limited because there is no VR. A long lens for wide-angle use is always bad. You forget that length too easily. The 24-70 Canon and Nikon lenses for full-frame rack out to their longest length at their widest setting- as do the 28-85 Nikkor and other older designs, and this means you are HERE using in effect a non-stabilized 70-200 SIZE glass to achieve 27-55mm effect-your in-stability is increased .Regardless of its speed that you cannot use most of the time, that is an extraordinarily long barrel for a 27-55mm lens- a zoom length of precious little use anyway!!
Wait till they IS it!!
Image stabilization really helps and the flip side of this argument is to say "at a wide angle setting, I don't need to hold the lens steady" which, at best is pretty sloppy. In low light, my 16-35VR is "sharper" with the VR on than with it off.
Bill Atkinson talked about this years ago but it looks like a lot more computer power is needed.
Blackraven: where are they made? Germany? Japan? Should be at least Japan right?
These comments show how silly it is to get caught up with brand names. Modern Contax cameras (good) were made by the same people who make Yashica (bad). Ricoh used to make cheap department store cameras (bad), now they make very impressive digital cameras (good). Sigma, which used to make lenses for places like Spiratone (bad) is now making lenses that people discuss in the same sentence as Zeiss (good). And Zeiss lenses, famous for their German quality (good) are now made by Cosina, who are capable of cranking out stuff in all price ranges (good & bad).
3dreal: didnt yashica tell last year that they will work with one or two german companies?btw: sigma is producing for sony, panasonic and Olympus. see yamaki-interview. thats why we will hardly see a foveon MILC. Until sony has establishe its new Foveon-like sensor, right?
There isn't much money in cameras. See how Sony is not making money from electronics. "Sony's Bread and Butter - It's Not Electronics" (NY Times).
Steve Balcombe: Touit? Is that pronounced twit, or twee?
I'm not just having a cheap laugh at Zeiss's expense here, this is a genuine issue - do they not employ English-speaking international marketing people??
It's a European thing. Leitz and and Durst, among others had a long history of making up new words including the notorious Leica close-up device,"nooky hesum". And "poison" in German is "gift".
Let's hear more about those exhilarating Nikon experiences. How about a once in a lifetime opportunity to have a gray market Nikon repaired at Nikon USA, with a 24-hour turnaround?
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review